May 1, 2006


Blog Readers Unmasked (Zachary A. Goldfarb and Chris Cillizza, May 1, 2006, Washington Post)

Think the people who while away their hours reading and commenting on political blogs are slovenly twenty-somethings with nothing better to do?

Think again, said a survey last week by Blogads, a company that many leading political blogs have used for ad placements.

In an unscientific Web survey of 36,000 people, Blogads reported that political blog readers tend to be age 41 to 50, male (72 percent), and earn $60,000 to $90,000 per year. Two in five have college degrees, while just a tad less have graduate degrees.

It's always amusing when folks mistake the blogosphere for the voice of America, when it generally just reflects the views of one special interest.

Posted by Orrin Judd at May 1, 2006 7:36 AM

So educated, experienced, successful people are now defined as a special interest? Are any benefits available?

But if the literacy and intellect of the average poster to the most popular left-wing blogs is reflective of this group, we're in very big trouble.

Posted by: Peter B at May 1, 2006 9:06 AM


Middle-aged white males in sales jobs. If you want to know what they "think" about any given issue just turn on a conservative radio talk show.

Posted by: oj at May 1, 2006 9:09 AM

This is no surprise: Rush quotes these same stats every time he hears he preaches to the simpletons. But for some reason, Sean Hannity does not.

BTW, is there any doubt in anyone's mind that Bush and the GOP are the biggest beneficiaries of this media-centric, blog-infested culture? All Dubya has to do is let everyone's voice burn out on any given issue (really, how long will the "earmark" mini-kerfuffle last?), and he takes over from there.

Makes one wonder what would happen if the Dems were to just shut up.

Posted by: Brad S at May 1, 2006 9:19 AM


Anyone who threatens to call his/her Congresscritter is a "special interest." That includes anyone prompted to do so by talk radio.

There are no "common people" anymore.

Posted by: Brad S at May 1, 2006 9:21 AM


I don't need to listen to them. I get all my political insight from taxi drivers. :-)

Posted by: Peter B at May 1, 2006 9:33 AM

Pubbies had slightly less edumacation, yet made slightly more money.............


Posted by: Sandy P at May 1, 2006 12:05 PM

Sandy, that's because the advanced degrees the left brags about are in "disciplines" that nobody wants or needs, so the owners of those masters and doctorates take what jobs they can get and those are low paying.

Posted by: erp at May 1, 2006 3:34 PM

To be precise, all the dems have masters and PhDs in Education, the only discipline in which you are required to graduate knowing less than when you matriculated.

Posted by: David Cohen at May 1, 2006 5:24 PM



While in college, I pondered becoming a high school physics teacher. I took an education class, gave a presentation on epistomology, received stares from everyone, realized I was wasting my time, and stayed in engineering.

Posted by: ratbert at May 1, 2006 10:44 PM

David, don't forget those with advanced degrees in Black Studies, Women's Studies, Cross-Gender Studies ...

ratbert, your decision not to stay in education was our loss. My younger son's junior high school science teacher was so ill informed, I don't remember the topic, that the kid had to set him straight and he didn't appreciate it.

Posted by: erp at May 2, 2006 8:24 AM